Hi guy's,... I thought the camera was good until i view it on my computer...it's kinda granny with lots of noise... it looks good in the 1080p display but not on FB or in my computer rofl. I guess something is really wrong with the camera.
hatyrei said:
Hi guy's,... I thought the camera was good until i view it on my computer...it's kinda granny with lots of noise... it looks good in the 1080p display but not on FB or in my computer rofl. I guess something is really wrong with the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome to mobile cameras, they all throw pixel count at you when what they really need are better sensors. I have NEVER had a phone camera take pictures that didn't have tons of noise and look like complete **** on a decent monitor. In my experience thus far, this camera is no different than others I've seen.
Agree^^
charlatan01 said:
In my experience thus far, this camera is no different than others I've seen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you compare to Maxx HD?
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
Great minds think alikeļ¼
Disagree.. maybe its your laptop... The pics from my rezound look awesome on my laptop
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Nokia has killer cameras. Even the old models, wish others would follw them
Sent from my Droid using xda app-developers app
Have been playing with the camera all day today. Compared to iphone5 this shows lot of noise especially in low light. When cmpared to gs3, noise is marginally higher in low light photos. Under good light conditions, this seems to produce most faithful color reproduction.
Just my observation
Yea, I just compared gsiii and DNA cameras, I think gsiii is better most of the time, but not in color reproduction. But honestly, they are both awful. :thumbdown:
Sent from HTC Droid DNA
I just downloaded camera 360 from the market, and its so much better than the stock camera.
I went downtown Detroit last night after Dinner, and even though I said that the S3 Camera is better, I'll retract my statement (different thread) after taking some low lights pics. The Low Light Pics on my S3 looked horrible.....but was pleasantly surprised by this camera. I attached a few pictures to show that the pics in low light actually look pretty damn good, especially since it was taken with a Phone, and I was a bit tipsy after drinking too much at Dinner (hands weren't exactly steady).
tdetroit said:
I went downtown Detroit last night after Dinner, and even though I said that the S3 Camera is better, I'll retract my statement (different thread) after taking some low lights pics. The Low Light Pics on my S3 looked horrible.....but was pleasantly surprised by this camera. I attached a few pictures to show that the pics in low light actually look pretty damn good, especially since it was taken with a Phone, and I was a bit tipsy after drinking too much at Dinner (hands weren't exactly steady).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn... I was going to pick up that phone today but after seeing these pics I don't think I am. A good camera is very important to me, maybe I'll get the Lumia 920 instead...
Well, what do you expect from a phone's camera? Whatever the camera's hardware is, if 90% of its settings are controlled automatically, the result is most probably going to suck. In a darker scene, this phone's software may want to bump the ISO higher than another phone's software, hence this noise and lack of detail. But anyway, a different camera app and you knowing how to use it will most probably show better results.
For me, a cellphone's camera is not much more than a barcode scanner.
Exactly. Phone cameras will always suck compared to a quality Point&Shoot. Smaller sensor, few manual settings, and software made by phone manufacturers, not Canon/Nikon. It's fine for a decent landscape shot or portrait on a sunny day but some people just have ridiculous expectations.
People spend thousands of dollars on camera equipment that works well in low light or for fast action. Maybe the iPhone 5 is marginally better than this, but I've played with my family's new iPhones and IMO the camera is still just a phone camera. If I wanted to take a good picture I'd bring something else.
Some comparisons
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
ilogik said:
Damn... I was going to pick up that phone today but after seeing these pics I don't think I am. A good camera is very important to me, maybe I'll get the Lumia 920 instead...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't forget-I was NOT really holding the camera steady (Tipsy), but my spouse had my S3 and the DNA's pics actually look better in those low-light shots than on the S3. I need to go to the Conservatory and take some daylight shots of all the tropical plants. THAT'S where I usually take my dSLR and even when I took the S3 there, the pics came out great,popping colors, etc.... Let's see how the DNA can handle those.
The difference is amazing!!!
WilliamStern said:
I just downloaded camera 360 from the market, and its so much better than the stock camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just downloaded the Camera 360 Ultimate from the Play Store and the difference is very, VERY noticeable. EVERY DNA owner needs to switch immediately. It's COMPLETELY a software issue. I'll be testing other camera apps right now, but this was a drastic improvement!!!
tdetroit said:
I went downtown Detroit last night after Dinner, and even though I said that the S3 Camera is better, I'll retract my statement (different thread) after taking some low lights pics. The Low Light Pics on my S3 looked horrible.....but was pleasantly surprised by this camera. I attached a few pictures to show that the pics in low light actually look pretty damn good, especially since it was taken with a Phone, and I was a bit tipsy after drinking too much at Dinner (hands weren't exactly steady).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On my monitor those pictures look absolutely horrible, grainy and pixely. Are you using a stock camera or a 3rd party one?
NOsquid said:
Exactly. Phone cameras will always suck compared to a quality Point&Shoot. Smaller sensor, few manual settings, and software made by phone manufacturers, not Canon/Nikon. It's fine for a decent landscape shot or portrait on a sunny day but some people just have ridiculous expectations.
People spend thousands of dollars on camera equipment that works well in low light or for fast action. Maybe the iPhone 5 is marginally better than this, but I've played with my family's new iPhones and IMO the camera is still just a phone camera. If I wanted to take a good picture I'd bring something else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well no camera will ever be like buying a nikon but getting normal point&shoot quality pics isn't much to ask for, nokias are able to achieve it, seems to be just a part of the phone being skimped on. Nothing to stop me frfom buyin though, they are "good enough"
Sent from my Droid using xda app-developers app
docnok63 said:
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, something is definitely wrong with your lens. Half those pictures look flat out BLURRY. There are a bevy of example shots from the DNA, just google some and take a look. I'd upload some of my own if it werent for the fact they're already out there. Those pictures you took look like something my 2001 blackberry pearl took.
Related
Hey is the atrix's camera better than the iphone 4's?
I've read many reviews, and it looks like the atrix 4g's camera is just average.
This is kind of depressing , considering I wanted a phone with a nice camera.
I would ssay the camera is alright, but I saw some comparison pictures today that showed they weren't as good as the iPhone 4's pics.
Of course things like for and saturation can be fixed with a little light edititjng, but who wants to do that right?
Captivate 2.2.1 Paragon
FLAC Vest said:
I would ssay the camera is alright, but I saw some comparison pictures today that showed they weren't as good as the iPhone 4's pics.
Of course things like for and saturation can be fixed with a little light edititjng, but who wants to do that right?
Captivate 2.2.1 Paragon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how far off from the iphone's camera is it? I guess I could just use picsay pro to fill in the missing holes. =/
the camera seems garbage by looking at the pictures in the engadget review. pictures look purple/blue. reminds me of the nokia e71
franciscojavierleon said:
the camera seems garbage by looking at the pictures in the engadget review. pictures look purple/blue. reminds me of the nokia e71
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
=(((((((((((((9
franciscojavierleon said:
the camera seems garbage by looking at the pictures in the engadget review. pictures look purple/blue. reminds me of the nokia e71
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Definitely a purple bluish tint. Although that does suck, I will have my Captivate as a backup.
Captivate 2.2.1 Paragon
In my experience with the HTC EVO, the auto white-balance in Android, in a word, blows. However, selecting the white-balance for the situation at hand works great.
Comparing the Atrix 4g camera to the iphone 4 camera? To a phone that took how many years to even get a decent camera? And sadly, with as many co-workers of mine who have the iphone 4, I can tell you that it's camera ain't that great. The iphone 4 finally got a 5mp camera. Wow, so impressive... Score one for apple! Why don't we wait and judge the camera quality in real life.
DumIam said:
Comparing the Atrix 4g camera to the iphone 4 camera? To a phone that took how many years to even get a decent camera? And sadly, with as many co-workers of mine who have the iphone 4, I can tell you that it's camera ain't that great. The iphone 4 finally got a 5mp camera. Wow, so impressive... Score one for apple! Why don't we wait and judge the camera quality in real life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please lay off the myth that more MP=more quality. The quality of a camera is related to the quality and the size of the lens. I couldn't care less if a phone's camera is 3MP as long as it has a good lens. The iphone4's camera has pretty big lens that's the reason the pictures are very nice for a phone.
Sadly the atrix has a crappy camera, but i am hopeful the purple tint can be fixed in a update.
DumIam said:
Comparing the Atrix 4g camera to the iphone 4 camera? To a phone that took how many years to even get a decent camera? And sadly, with as many co-workers of mine who have the iphone 4, I can tell you that it's camera ain't that great. The iphone 4 finally got a 5mp camera. Wow, so impressive... Score one for apple! Why don't we wait and judge the camera quality in real life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow you really are a hater arent you? the iphone 4 camera is actually real good for a camera phone. it's quick to start and takes some pretty good pictures. and ya the atrix 4g is not even out yet; but motorola has been in the camera phone market for years; so they've had even more time than apple to develop a good camera phone. i know your an apple hater; but learn to give credit where it's due; the iphone has many negatives; the camera is not one of them.
I'm just hoping the camera is better than the one I had on my aria.
Cant' remember the last time i thought "you know, that is so awesome i'll take a picture, let me grab my cell phone". None of them take amazing pictures, and if it's worth taking a picture of, i'll grab my real camera.
Cell phone can have the best lens physically possible for that size, and it's still defeated by the dust that collects over it.
cegna09 said:
Cant' remember the last time i thought "you know, that is so awesome i'll take a picture, let me grab my cell phone". None of them take amazing pictures, and if it's worth taking a picture of, i'll grab my real camera.
Cell phone can have the best lens physically possible for that size, and it's still defeated by the dust that collects over it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your right; no camera phone will take a pic even close to my DSLR; but to be honest with you, the iphone4 takes pics that are good enough if they're just for my computer. the DSLR is bulky and isnt always there when you need it; your phone is usually always with you; so it's nice to have a phone that takes somewhat decent pictures. i remember when i first got my e71 and was so disappointed in the camera; hope the atrix is not the same. but it sure looked similar during engadgets review
Yes it's nice to have for little things, and i use it for that, i'm just saying i've never looked at a cell phone and thought "yes, this will replace my camera"
I'll reserve judgement for when i get mine. Engadget has been proving their incompetence more and more lately, so i put little to no faith in their ability to create fair or accurate tests.
I love having a camera in my pocket at all times but every phone I've ever had has taken disappointing pictures. My touch pro 2 takes alright/almost acceptable shots outside during the day but in low light its not even worth trying. I am looking forward to the led flash on the atrix but I'm sure it will be a while before a phone replaces stand alone cameras for even point and shoot average Joes.
I took this picture a few minutes ago. Let me know what you guys think.
http://plixi.com/p/78972232
And yes, it was with the Atrix.
Eh, for what I use my camera for (pictures at bars, on the beach, videos of people doing stupid ****), I don't need a 12 mp megashooter that can capture the individual pores on your nose. I'm just happy to finally have a flash on my phone.
Fixter said:
I took this picture a few minutes ago. Let me know what you guys think.
http://plixi.com/p/78972232
And yes, it was with the Atrix.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't like that picture......only because I want to be where your at...
n0kia916 said:
I don't like that picture......only because I want to be where your at...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. But I think the camera is really good. Is a very cloudy and gloomy day so thats why it looks a little sad.
omaralt said:
wow you really are a hater arent you? the iphone 4 camera is actually real good for a camera phone. it's quick to start and takes some pretty good pictures. and ya the atrix 4g is not even out yet; but motorola has been in the camera phone market for years; so they've had even more time than apple to develop a good camera phone. i know your an apple hater; but learn to give credit where it's due; the iphone has many negatives; the camera is not one of them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not a hater at all lol. but give credit where credit is due. My nokia n 95 had a terrific camera. My sony k 850 I had an even better camera. My question is this; why is everybody going gaga over the camera in over the camera in the iphone when it took four generations for apple to finally install a halfway decent camera? In reality people should have been booing apple for the 3 phones with lousy cameras.
Sent from my SGH-I897 using XDA App
How do u guys think the Evo 3D still pictures will compare in quality to the original Evo?
I know megapixels isn't everything, and of course I'm talking only about 2D stills, but I'm wondering if the still pictures from the 3D will be better
Sent from my Evo. Powered by MikFroyo, netarchy, XDA, and the tears of iPhone owners
They better be because the evos camera was garbage no lie
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
LoveisPeace2012 said:
They better be because the evos camera was garbage no lie
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree. The Evo 1's camera is adequate and even better than my 4 year old camera. I take pictures exclusively with it now and they look pretty damn good.
Granted, I'd never spend $1500 on a freaking camera and you might be one of those "photographer" types (i put that in quotes because I don't consider that a real profession, merely a hobby that people get paid for) who believe that an 8mp cell phone camera should look like an 8mp nokia whatever-x5000. It's a cell phone, the camera is more a convenience. Considering 5 years ago, pictures with a cell phone looked like an 8-bit video games, I'd say they're making fantastic and amazing headway on itty bitty tiny mobile cameras.
On that note, since it's a year later and technology has improved, the Evo 3d really should have a better camera than an Evo 4g. Especially since the camera is a key feature in the new hardware.
From what I've seen in review videos (also taking into account that I'm not getting the full experience through a camera), the pictures have a pretty good quality, but I'd have to see them in person to accurately judge them.
AbsolutZeroGI said:
I disagree. The Evo 1's camera is adequate and even better than my 4 year old camera. I take pictures exclusively with it now and they look pretty damn good.
Granted, I'd never spend $1500 on a freaking camera and you might be one of those "photographer" types (i put that in quotes because I don't consider that a real profession, merely a hobby that people get paid for) who believe that an 8mp cell phone camera should look like an 8mp nokia whatever-x5000. It's a cell phone, the camera is more a convenience. Considering 5 years ago, pictures with a cell phone looked like an 8-bit video games, I'd say they're making fantastic and amazing headway on itty bitty tiny mobile cameras.
On that note, since it's a year later and technology has improved, the Evo 3d really should have a better camera than an Evo 4g. Especially since the camera is a key feature in the new hardware.
From what I've seen in review videos (also taking into account that I'm not getting the full experience through a camera), the pictures have a pretty good quality, but I'd have to see them in person to accurately judge them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, I am sure there are MANY people that would take offense to that.How is photography any less of a profession then any other job? I would like to see you even come close to some of the pictures professionals can take. The cameras crap on it...
yeah those nokia cameras are ****ing sweet
I wonder why they didn't put dual 8mp on the back, instead of the dual 5mp it's got now?
mattfmartin said:
I wonder why they didn't put dual 8mp on the back, instead of the dual 5mp it's got now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because MP have nothing to do with quality? It's how big it can be printed out, and to be honest you can't print a 3D picture, so yeah.
They did however mention that the cameras have a CMOS sensor (the sensor is what creates quality, MP have nothing to do with it) so I have extremely high hopes for this camera. If it does what I'm expecting it'll be my upgrade path most likely.
HTC usually either has hits or miss on the camera. Well just have to wait and see.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App
Pao23 said:
Because MP have nothing to do with quality? It's how big it can be printed out, and to be honest you can't print a 3D picture, so yeah.
They did however mention that the cameras have a CMOS sensor (the sensor is what creates quality, MP have nothing to do with it) so I have extremely high hopes for this camera. If it does what I'm expecting it'll be my upgrade path most likely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea your right. My hd2 is only 5mp and it takes really good photos. Was just wondering why they decided with 5mp, when the evo has 8mp.
mattfmartin said:
Yea your right. My hd2 is only 5mp and it takes really good photos. Was just wondering why they decided with 5mp, when the evo has 8mp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Two 8mp images per 3d picture is probably why. 5mp will take enough space as it is.
That and the thing is... there really is no way currently to have a "great" 8 mp camera on a phone, with a lens/ sensor that small.
Yea the reason for 5mp instead of dual 8mp has to do with image/video file size more than likely.
As for the Evo 1 camera, is have to say its the first phone camera I even considered replacing my real camera with. I have a 12mp ~$200 Sony camera that I never use. 4x6 prints look just as good on both. The Sony handles low light better, but its not worth carrying an extra device
Sent from my Evo. Powered by MikFroyo, netarchy, XDA, and the tears of iPhone owners
i dont really care about an upgrade to the camera, as i find it is decent enough for its usability and quality
BUT
they better work on that damned flash....while my pictures are good on the evo, at night everyone is a ghost
The new cmos sensor captures twice as much light in low light situations
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
noesilva said:
The new cmos sensor captures twice as much light in low light situations
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You got specs to back that up?
i want the camera to be noticeably better then iphone4
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
its all settings, I've seen good n bad on both
coolted said:
i want the camera to be noticeably better then iphone4
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my Evo. Powered by MikFroyo, netarchy, XDA, and the tears of iPhone owners
Eat it iPhone said:
its all settings, I've seen good n bad on both
Sent from my Evo. Powered by MikFroyo, netarchy, XDA, and the tears of iPhone owners
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol. In all the pictures i have seen comparing the two, the evo has been worse.
AbsolutZeroGI said:
I disagree. The Evo 1's camera is adequate and even better than my 4 year old camera. I take pictures exclusively with it now and they look pretty damn good.
Granted, I'd never spend $1500 on a freaking camera and you might be one of those "photographer" types (i put that in quotes because I don't consider that a real profession, merely a hobby that people get paid for) who believe that an 8mp cell phone camera should look like an 8mp nokia whatever-x5000. It's a cell phone, the camera is more a convenience. Considering 5 years ago, pictures with a cell phone looked like an 8-bit video games, I'd say they're making fantastic and amazing headway on itty bitty tiny mobile cameras.
On that note, since it's a year later and technology has improved, the Evo 3d really should have a better camera than an Evo 4g. Especially since the camera is a key feature in the new hardware.
From what I've seen in review videos (also taking into account that I'm not getting the full experience through a camera), the pictures have a pretty good quality, but I'd have to see them in person to accurately judge them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My 2cents on this:
Photography is an art, just like painting, tattoos, piercings, acting (stage and TV) and have all been around for as long as history has been written (except for the acting on TV of course). But to talk about getting paid for a hobby, lets now include sports (ALL Sports) and these are also considered "hobbies" but these people get paid more than doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc. You don't complain about them though.
About the camera, like said before....its a phone, 5MP is awesome AND IT HAS TWO. For daily use, it should/will get the job done. If your a "professional" D) then you would not even consider using the phone for your work. It's called convenience and it's why you pay $700 for a phone that can play movies, pictures, search the web, play low quality game (that can be addictive), TEXT, have a camera and flashlight with you at all times, GPS (all this on a relatively small screen) and I guess make a call.
Don't discriminate!
I'm a massive fan of the EVO and am pre-ordering the 3D immediately. That being said, the EVO 1 pictures aren't as good as the Iphones. In Outdoor, sunny situations they are excellent but indoors they suck compare to the iphone. Also, the flash handling really is garbage, I'm always trying to adjust the white balance to account for it or take my picture slightly further back etc etc. It's just ****ty and then I see my brother iPhone 4 pics using OOTB settings taking the same stupid picture of our family at the table and its way better.
I would really like to see some information stating that the CMOS sensor is 2x as good...it certainly better be!!
Another note, the iPhone 4 video is a WORLD above the EVO in lower light. It embarrassing. I brag about my phone but then can't use the video from a basketball game because its indoors and again...brothers iPhone videos look pretty good.
A side note, can't stand apple and their draconian koolaid they sell all the schmucks on
Camera Quality
I've found that when were dealing with pictures in natural lighting, the results are absolutely AMAZING, but when it comes to low light, darkness and requiring the flash, that is when the coloring was off and blurry etc. i would expect the same from the new camera just as basically every phone cam i've seen.
hi guys. im just curious how the video and pictures on the evo3d look compared to other 5 or 8mp cameras. are they sharp ect. how would the evo3d compare to say the iphone 4?
im in the market for a good camera phone
I personally feel the evo3d only takes great pictures sometimes - meaning it is hard to get good pictures.
The pictures tend to look better on the phone than when you look at them on a computer, where they tend to look more grainy when not in the brightest light. This feels like a step down from HTC's other offerings, which can look as good if not better than iphone pictures when pulled to your computer. I have gotten some fantastic pictures, but for the most part the camera has left me a bit wanting.
Playing around with 3d pictures is quite fun, and video recording is very good - particularly the audio, which was lacking in the evo4g.
eazye1984 said:
hi guys. im just curious how the video and pictures on the evo3d look compared to other 5 or 8mp cameras. are they sharp ect. how would the evo3d compare to say the iphone 4?
im in the market for a good camera phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It takes a much better picture than the Evo4G did. Much sharper looking, even with 3mp less.
However in low light it still gets grainy...the sensor can't help that, but the software can...but it doesn't. It does, however, take fantastic macro shots for a cell phone...surprisingly.
The 5mp cam on the NS4G I had for a few weeks was phenomenal. When I came back to the E3D it really made taking pictures with it seem pointless...and that's not even taking into consideration the .5-1.5 second shutter lag from when you push the button.
For a freakin' cell phone? It's fantastic. I've never used an iphone4 camera but I've only heard good things. But after seeing what a Samsung 5.0mp sensor/lens/software combo can do I am completely down on the E3D's camera. Granted it does 3D and it is a rather compelling effect...though the problems with the 5.0mp single-cam shots get even more pronounced in 3D at 2.5mp.
YMMV, etc etc etc. It is a cellphone after all.
EDIT: Also any shots with motion are pretty much ruined before you take them.
I agree with nhutpham, post number 2. The camera is not nearly what it should be. This phone revolved around its camera's, I mean come on its not called "Shooter" for nothing. 3D pics turn out good, still shots do anyway. But standard pics, thats a whole other ball game. Low light produces bad pics, even with the flash. Some pics will get a greenish tint to them (whites) when using flash. Rather then use all the "auto" settings I find setting things manually will result in better 2D pics. The device was not purchased by me for the camera though. I bought for the dual core processors Though now that I have my dual core I am wishing HTC would have stepped it up on the 2D camera
i think at stock the pictures look ok. but when you adjust iso,sharpness,exposure,contrast in the settings it makes them look much more vibrant and sharp.
i took a compartive shot of small rocks and the evo3d looked crisper and better overall compared to the iphone 4. so the camera cant be all that bad
Maybe this might help. I'm actually surprised at some of the pictures on here.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1243765
Being a photographer myself, I am impressed with the camera... but not all of the time. It takes phenomenal pictures outside in a good sunny day and even in overcast. Take the camera inside in average lighting of just about anyone's living room when the sunlight isn't dominating the light, then I'd be reluctant to show it of.
The poorer the lighting, the harder it is to focus and the photos can get very grainy. HTC also chose to compress the photos quite a bit which affects the picture quality, but makes it easier on the phone and network to share and upload. This goes back to a previous comment that they look better on the phone than on a larger display - its the compression.
If you're willing to root and mod this phone, there is a camera mod in the CDMA dev forum for this phone with camera improvements which makes me that much more impressed with the camera. Although, I think all that was changed was the compression for photos and video.
If you are taking a still picture under good light they look really good. If you have kids and are planning to take any pictures of them forget it.
Let's just they are playing baseball and you want to take a picture of them at bat. They get up there and you click the shoot button. The picture is then shown to you for review and you say wait, who the heck is that. Well while you thought you were snapping a picture of your child, by the time the camera actually took the picture your child got a double, the kid after him grounded to third, and in your picture is the batter who was batting 2 guys after him.....Great picture of someone elses child and of course that kid moved so the picture is blurry as well.
Okay, maybe I am exaggerating a little. You would probably get the batter right after him and not 2 guys down in the lineup, but it would still be blurry unless he batted like a statue....
Green, but otherwise good
Ya unfortunately the shutter lag makes the phone worthless in taking non still images.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Id like to ask, does anyone know if there are going to be any tweaks coming out that are for the S3's still's camera?
I personally find that if i'm shooting pics in my garden, that the grass looks luminous green, and over-saturated.
Now, not starting a war here - i sold my 4S to get an S3, but i do find the S3 images a fair bit less realistic than my old iPhone
JCM800 said:
Id like to ask, does anyone know if there are going to be any tweaks coming out that are for the S3's still's camera?
I personally find that if i'm shooting pics in my garden, that the grass looks luminous green, and over-saturated.
Now, not starting a war here - i sold my 4S to get an S3, but i do find the S3 images a fair bit less realistic than my old iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are looking the images on your phone, it's because of the Super AMOLED screen...
It tends to oversaturate colors, thats normal.
But I know that the camera also oversaturate colors a little bit, nothing big, but it does.
JCM800 said:
Id like to ask, does anyone know if there are going to be any tweaks coming out that are for the S3's still's camera?
I personally find that if i'm shooting pics in my garden, that the grass looks luminous green, and over-saturated.
Now, not starting a war here - i sold my 4S to get an S3, but i do find the S3 images a fair bit less realistic than my old iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there are a tweaks already available for download that enhances the audio and video bitrate as well as added physical buttons for still images...have a search around.
Just change the many camera settings already available on the handset before shooting...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Change camera setting before a shot..
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
i agree that the super AMOLED screen makes the image look over saturated. Looks great on the phone screen but poor once you open the file on a computer. I like to experiment with different settings and then touch up the images in post. just keep in mind that lighting is on your side, you just have to know how to manage the amount of light taken in by the camera
I'm still testing out the features and hope to get a good setting but honestly i find that my photos using my old HTC Sensation were better quality.
Also, i have edited the media_profiles.xml file and increased the bitrate, that is my tweak. anything else would be on the user.
First off anyone claiming iphone 4s photos are more realistic than photos on s3 is telling a few porkies especially if they use Hdr on 4s as that makes iphone pics look as unreal as it gets. Secondly the photos on s3 blow the 4s away regardless of the mythical over saturation of colours.
Take any pics on s3 and ip4s side by side on auto in a variety of situations and I guarantee the iphone pics will be sub standard 99 percent of the time, colour balance or no.
Sgs3 takes as good photos as my cannon powershot 14mp easily.
swift2fly said:
i agree that the super AMOLED screen makes the image look over saturated. Looks great on the phone screen but poor once you open the file on a computer. I like to experiment with different settings and then touch up the images in post. just keep in mind that lighting is on your side, you just have to know how to manage the amount of light taken in by the camera
I'm still testing out the features and hope to get a good setting but honestly i find that my photos using my old HTC Sensation were better quality.
Also, i have edited the media_profiles.xml file and increased the bitrate, that is my tweak. anything else would be on the user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really you think the Sensation took better pictures?
I have a HTC Sensation and the picture quality from this phone is shocking in all but the best daylight conditions, and even then it's no match for the S3 or the S2 for that matter, as for video quality on the Sensation not even gonna go there lol
ixon2001 said:
Really you think the Sensation took better pictures?
I have a HTC Sensation and the picture quality from this phone is shocking in all but the best daylight conditions, and even then it's no match for the S3 or the S2 for that matter, as for video quality on the Sensation not even gonna go there lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea so far. but i need to fully test the camera on the s3. i still prefer using the htc sense camera on the sensation.
sent from my ancient alien phone
Seeing some posts about which has a better camera here is a picture at 100% crop, left is GS3 and right is DNA. What do you think?
Link to full res file:
https://app.dumptruck.goldenfrog.com/p/lIhSYV5Klf
The color of the sky shows the most distinction. Clear blue vs. greyish.
True but the building looks less washed out and richer on the DNA.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
That is a great comparision. Thanks. Both look good. GS3 looks a tad better.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
The GS3 definitely looks better. More accurate colors, better exposure, and higher detail on fine lines and text.
Some comparisons
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
docnok63 said:
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First images the big difference is white balance easy to fix. Both images need adjustment.
Second set of images yes the Iphone is brighter. But its to bright the highlights are all blown. From the view point of post processing the DNA image has better shadow detail and high lights are properly exposed. You can not fix what is not there. There for you can not restore the lost high light detail in the Iphone images. And again both images need white balance adjustments.
Oh and by the way pixel peeping cell phone images is stupid. They are just snapshots. 99 percent of them are going to end up at 72 DPI with heavy JPG compression for web posting anyway, Or worse yet slapped with canned Instagram filters.
Tbh both look **** but that is every Camera Phone out there until they make the Galaxy Camera into a Phone.
I wouldn't look at either of them on their own in a pic on facebook and call out the colours or picture quality......... it is what it is, a picture take from a phone.
People love to make a big deal about it, I'm not ever going to own a GS3 or a Droid DNA but tbh :\ Both look the same to me in terms of quality.
---------- Post added at 01:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:41 AM ----------
docnok63 said:
Some people didn't like my review of the DNA saying that I was too harsh on the 1080p 440ppi display. How could it possibly be worse than the 720p S3 panel? Well, I think these will speak for themselves:
First a short video shot by an iPhone 4S...DNA vs S3 playing Underworld Awakening. It's a bit hard to show how much the S3 dominates because it's a video of video playback, but the most accurate part is when Selene and Michael are kissing. You can see the skin tone is MUCH better:
http://db.tt/Z597Hcuc
Then the friend with the iPhone 4S and I went out and took some shots. He's taller than me, so the angles are a bit off, but you get the idea. 4S is on the left, DNA on the right:
http://db.tt/edmZQvMD
http://db.tt/cBAcLDwo
http://db.tt/9sHcE6yO
http://db.tt/hORDltQq
http://db.tt/G3pabYog
As you can clearly see, the DNA gets smoked when it comes to color and brightness. Either I have a bad panel or sensor or this camera/video playback is just simply inferior right out the box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On the video the Droid DNA reflects so much light, though Samsung devices have always been on the lowest side of reflecting light, only just beaten now by the iPhone 5.
In pictures (I haven't read your post so I dunno which is which) the one on the right look a lot better.
FIXED!!!!
I saw a post about Camera 360 Ultimate after I posted my shots. This 3rd party app COMPLETELY fixed this issues. The default camera software absolutely blows. I purchased Camera ZOOM FX a long time ago and installed it. Again, the issues are all gone. Do NOT use the default camera.
I also resolved the video playback issue with the 3rd party app called MX player. Under settings, I checked all the boxes under hardware decoding, changed CPU core limit to 4, changed Color depth to 32-bit, and then after the movie started playing I turned the brightness all the way up. I'm not sure if all those steps are necessary, but it fixed ALL my complaints regarding video playback on the DNA.
I'm SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo much happier with my phone choice now!!!!
the dna colors look more realistic in the photos. the iphone is way too bright and white. and i cant wait to try the dna! the rezound camera was the best out then and hope the dna to be the same!